Senior police officer facing sack over claims of rough, non-consensual sex

A senior Queensland police officer could be sacked over claims he had non-consensual rough sex with two women, but will not be prosecuted over the allegations.

It was alleged the detective senior sergeant spiked the women’s drinks before engaging in extreme sex, though a criminal investigation found there was not enough evidence for him to be charged.

The details of the incidents came to light during a Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal hearing over the Queensland Police Service sanction against the officer.

The women, who met the officer at a gym where he was an instructor, had reported the incidents to the Crime and Corruption Commission, and then the police in 2020, after they realised they had had similar experiences in 2016 and 2018.

The first woman told police the officer had watched her in a public bathroom and attempted to have sex with her at her home, and then slapped her while they were drunk. Another time, he had rough sex with her in a public shower at a camping ground.

On another occasion, he used zip ties and rope to restrain her during sex, and poured a red substance over her while restrained.

The second woman said she was plied with alcohol, slapped in the face multiple times, engaged in rough and demeaning sex, and was restrained with bondage materials during sex.

The officer did not deny the events happened, but believed the sex was consensual, and the intoxication was “mid-range”, QCAT Member Richard Oliver said.

“On the females’ recollection, it was forced upon them and there is even an inference that they were drugged,” he said.

Following an investigation by the QPS Ethical Standards Command, Assistant Commissioner Maurice Carless decided the officer should be dismissed for misconduct in February 2022.

The officer called for a review of the misconduct finding, which relied heavily on the fact the investigation had not found the sex was non-consensual.

Oliver said it was not disputed the alleged misconduct occurred during the officer’s private time, and it was not alleged that he used police resources to commit any alleged crimes.

“The only relevant feature of the factual circumstances, in relation to each of the females involved, is that they knew the applicant was a police officer,” he said.

Under this reading, the only important matters were whether his actions were disgraceful, improper or unbecoming of an officer, showed unfitness to be an officer, or did not meet the standards expected of an officer, Oliver said.

Oliver said while there was little evidence the officer used his position to groom the women or build trust, he still acted in a way that was “disgraceful and improper and crossed the line to render it misconduct”.

The matter will return to the tribunal to hear material on the severity of the sanction after the appeals process runs out on November 1.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.